POL00041772
POL00041772
Message
From: Patrick Bourke [! GRO
Sent: 11/05/2018 17:
To:
Andrew
ce:
Subject: Re: Litigation and Appointment - next steps - STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL
Jane
Just to round this off for our day, and to start yours:
Andy, Rod, Mark and I spoke about this on the phone this afternoon, following my earlier call with Richard.
We're all in the same place - ours is not an objection on principle, but is borne of understandable concerns
about how information is/would be handled by UKGI/BEIS.
On that basis, the 4 of us discussed what it would take to give us greater confidence, and some
obvious suggestions include named people at UKGI/BEIS, restricted channels etc. Rod, I think with Andy's help,
is working something up as a starting point for us to consider with you when you're back.
I subsequently spoke to Richard again, and it seems something like this would work for them too (obviously
the more prescriptive we are, the more difficult it will be, but I'm confident we can strike a balance that works
for both if we can show equivalent levels of pragmatism). I stressed the point about not wanting to engage
in endless work ‘updating’ them about non-material issues - he (sort of) took the point, but I will doubtless
have to do some more work here.
So, not over yet, but hopefully an acceptable end in slightly closer view.
Best wishes
Patrick
From: Rodric Williams
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2018 1:40:57 PM
To: Jane MacLeod; Andrew Parsons
Cc: Mark Underwood1; Patrick Bourke
Subject: RE: Litigation and Appointment - next steps - STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL
Jane,
ve taken a quick look at the mark up and I don’t think we're that far apart. The two sticking points seem to be:
2. Confidential vs Privileged Material. I don’t understand why UKGI want to draw a distinction between
confidential and privileged information. I can’t see any basis for it in law, and UKGI should treat everything they
POL-0038254
POL00041772
POL00041772
receive from us on the Group Lit as confidential. I would have thought that was obvious, and certainly easier to
manage from their perspective.
We're going to have a quick internal call between us at 3pm this afternoon, after which lil cali Elizabeth (I certainly want
to understand why they want to draw the confidential/privileged distinction). A meeting between Paula and Alex
Chisholm may be very helpful in getting this across the line.
A meeting to clarify the position
Rod
From: Jane MacLeod
Sent: 11 May 2018 1.
To: Rodric Williams
Cc: Mark Underwood1
Subject: Fwd: Litigatio
Andrew Parsons ¢_
Patrick Bourke ¢
LY CONFIDENTIAL
Andy, Rod
Iam very concerned about this, and I’m struggling to see a way through this. Paula has offered a meeting with
Alex Chisholmto explain the issues, and that may be the only way we get round this.
I’m aftiad I’m at the end of my day, so any further action today U.K. time will need to come from you.
Thoughts?
Jane MacLeod
Group Director Legal, Risk & Governance
Post Office
From: O'Neill, Elizabeth - UKGI <
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2018 8:42:32 PM
To: Rodric Williams
Cc: Lambert, Helen - UKGI; Jane MacLeod; Callard, Richard - UKGI; Cooper, Tom - UKGI; Clarke, Stephen - UKGI
Subject: Litigation and Appointment - next steps - STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL
Rodric,
I know you spoke to Helen Lambert yesterday who unfortunately is out ill at the moment so I am responding on her
behalf.
Thanks you for your markup of the protocol. It looks as though we are still a long way apart on this as your draft doesn’t
recognise a number of things that are essential to us in order to fulfil our function as shareholder and representative of
the SoS.
So I thought it would be helpful to provide some important background to explain the context in which we are
operating:
e Alex Chisholm is the accounting officer for POL and as such is accountable to Parliament for its actions. In order
to properly fulfil this role, he requires full and comprehensive information on the progress of this litigation. This
will not be possible if POL is not willing to provide written updates. We revised our requirements to provide for
POL-0038254
POL00041772
POL00041772
updates following reports to the Board to reduce any administrative burden as far as possible, but we cannot
agree to a protocol which includes no obligation on POL to report progress in writing in the litigation.
e Tom Cooper’s position on the Board and sub-committee cannot be viewed as a suitable substitute for a full and
proper reporting mechanism. Tom’s role on the board is to represent the views of the shareholder, he is unable
to do so effectively if the shareholder is not properly and directly informed and Tom is himself precluded from
relaying the most relevant information to the shareholder on the basis that it is legally privileged.
e This protocol was only ever intended to apply to legally privileged information. It is not appropriate to include
provisions such as these in respect of confidential information more widely.
e While legal privilege is an exception to FOIA, it is a qualified exception. It is not necessarily the case that all
information which is designated and treated as legally privileged will fall within the exception and therefore
SoS/UKGI cannot commit never to disclose information which is treated as privileged under this Protocol. It will
of course ensure that it complies with its obligations under Appendix 2 clauses 1.10 — 1.12 to inform and receive
representations from POL in respect of disclosure wherever possible.
We have redrafted the protocol to reflect these principles and a mark-up is attached. We would like to see it finalised
quickly given the litigation timetable. We hope our mark-up is acceptable but if you have comments we would propose
a meeting to get it finished.
In relation to the draft submission that we sent you for comments yesterday, this update has been requested by Alex
Chisholm to be provided this week. This highlights the practical obligations we are under to provide timely and relevant
information to Ministers and civil servants and the reasons for drafting the protocol along the lines we have
proposed. Please let us know when we can expect to receive comments.
Many thanks
Elizabeth
From: Rodric Williams
Sent: 02 May 2018 16:57
To: Lambert, Helen - UKGI 4
Cc: O'Neill, Elizabeth - UKGI*
Cooper, Tom - UKGI <1 “Y Garke, Stephen - UKGI 4 GRO, >
Subject: RE: Litigation and Appointment - next steps - STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL
Helen,
Thank you for providing us with your comments on the draft Information Sharing Protocol.
lattach a mark up showing our further amendments, which aim to reflect the discussion had at the meeting with Tom
Cooper, Richard Callard and Stephen Clarke last week.
Can I suggest you call me to discuss the attached if you have any areas of concern?
With thanks and kind regards, Rodric
UW Rodric Williams
Head of Legal - Dispute Resolution & Brand
20 Finsbury Street
London EC2Y 940.
POL-0038254
POL00041772
POL00041772
2017 Winner of the Global Postal Award for Customer I
Experience t
From: Lambert, Helen - UKG
Sent: 20 April 2018 12:08
To: Rodric Williams ; Jane MacLeod <7
Cc: O'Neill, Elizabeth - UKGI < GRO “}Callard, Richard-UKGI< GRO }
Cooper, Tom - UKGI <) ey
Subject: RE: Litigation and Appointment - next steps - STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL
Importance: High
Rodric, Jane
Having spoken with policy leads at UKGI this morning, there is a strong desire to get this protocol agreed in advance of
meeting with the permanent secretary next week.
Could you please let me know as a matter of urgency if you will not be able to provide your thoughts on the policy by
COP on Monday.
Many thanks
Helen
Helen Lambert I Legal Secondee
UK Government Investments
_1 Victoria Street I London I SW1H OET
From: Lambert, Helen - UKGI
Sent: 19 April 2018 17:07
; Clarke, Stephen - UKGI
steps - STRICTLY CONFIDE!
Cooper, Tom - UKGI
Subject: FW: Litigati
Rodric, Jane
Thank you for your draft protocol, a revised draft is attached.
As you indicate below, the case is being proactively managed by the Sir Peter Fraser and as such the timetable is liable to
change dramatically. Because of this, we were somewhat uncomfortable with the fact that there would be over two
months between dates on which BEIS/UKGI would receive a formal update. To alleviate this, we have suggested a
provision that allows BEIS/UKGI to be informed of any material change in the timetable.
We have also clarified somewhat the information which can be disclosed to BEIS/UKGI by Tom Cooper, to ensure that
his role on the Board and Sub-committee can be properly utilised, as well as suggesting measures to allow for more
expedient sharing of privileged information. We would consider that assessing this information on a case-by-case basis
would be disproportionate in the context of the relationship between BEIS, UKGI and POL.
Finally we have requested that legal counsel is provided with written updates to ensure that BEIS/UKGI is able to keep a
strong and accurate audit trail in respect of its oversight of the litigation.
POL-0038254
POL00041772
POL00041772
We trust that the wording in this protocol assists with your concerns in respect of disclosure of legally privileged
information more widely.
We would be happy to discuss these points with you in person or over the phone.
Separately, we have noted that Tom Cooper has been appointed to the board. We assume that you are therefore
content with the proposed appointment attached (which I sent to you on 23 March 2018). Is it possible to arrange for
this appointment letter to be issued?
Kind regards
Helen
Helen Lambert I Legal Secondee
UK Government Investments
1 Victoria Street I London I SW1H OET
From: Rodric Williams [mailto: ]
Sent: 27 March 2018 18:44
To: O'Neill, Elizabeth - UKGI
; Patrick Bourke
, Richard - UKGI
Lambert, Helen - UKGI <
next steps - STRICTLY CO
Cc: Jane Macleod
Tom - UKGI <7"
Subject: RE:
Elizabeth,
Thank you for sending through your draft protocol identifying the touchpoints in the Post Office Group Litigation on
which you would like visibility.
Your touchpoints overlap substantially the matters on which we will be reporting to our Board of Directors as part of our
governance for managing the litigation and its risks. That governance includes the establishment of a Board
Subcommittee to receive legal advice on Post Office's defence as the litigation proceeds. Tom Cooper, BEIS/UKGI’s
shareholder representative on the Board, is a member of the Litigation Subcommittee, which will meet shortly before
full Board meetings so as to provide the full Board with contemporaneous, focussed updates.
In addition to the updates BEIS/UKGI will receive through its Board and Litigation Subcommittee representation, we are
also happy to provide updates on the litigation to BEIS/UKGI’s legal advisors. These should be done in-person or via
telephone conference call, immediately following the full Board meetings to ensure continuity and consistency of
reporting.
The above approach is reflected in the attached revised protocol, which is designed to protect Post Office’s claims to
legal professional privilege and attaches as appendices:
*® areporting timetable prepared around key stages in the litigation and our Board’s calendar; and
e the obligations which will accompany the disclosure of confidential information.
Please note that the litigation timetable is very likely to change in response to the proactive case management being
applied by the Managing Judge Sir Peter Fraser. It is also likely to change as the parties respond to developments in the
litigation itself. We do not however propose to make any changes to scheduled update meetings unless they require
Post Office to consider materially changing its approach to the litigation.
POL-0038254
POL00041772
POL00041772
We look forward to receiving your comments on our draft. I am very happy to discuss those in person or over the
telephone if you would find that easiest.
With kind regards, Rodric
e Rodric Williams
Head of Legal - Dispute Resolution & Brand
20 Finsbury Street
2017 Winner of the Global Postal Award for Customer
Experience
From: O'Neill, Elizabeth - UKGI [mailto:
Sent: 01 March 2018 15:51
To: Patrick Bourke <_
Cc: Jane MacLeod <
Richard - UKGI
: } Callard,
Cooper, Tom - UKGI+ GRO 5 Lambert, Helen - UKGI
tment - next steps
Patrick, Helen,
Thank you for your time last week.
As discussed, I attach a standard form litigation protocol along the lines of what we would propose to submit to the
Permanent Secretary. As you will see, this sets out various touchpoints in the litigation process, and the steps we intend
to take to ensure the Permanent Secretary remains fully informed at each salient point.
If you are able to provide more detail on the litigation timetable, or indeed if you have any comments or suggestions, we
would be happy to amend the protocol bespoke to the current litigation.
Separately I’d be grateful, as I indicated in my email to Helen on Monday, if in anticipation of Tom Cooper’s
appointment, you could let me know if you intend to agree an NDA similar to the one you have with Richard, and if so,
forward me the proposed text so that Tom and I may consider.
Kind regards,
Elizabeth
From: Patrick Bourke &
Sent: 23 February 2018 15°10
To: O'Neill, Elizabe a
Cc: Jane MacLeod?
Richard - UKGI ¢
Subject: Litigation Meeting
Dear Elizabeth
It was a pleasure to meet with you this morning.
POL-0038254
POL00041772
POL00041772
I just wanted to confirm that we have understood the need for an appropriately structured information flow in
relation to the matters we discussed earlier, and agree that some form of protocol to govern those arrangements
makes very good sense.
While recognising that there is no set format in this regard, it would nonetheless be helpful for us to draw
inspiration from similar arrangements you have put in place with other ALBs. You kindly offered to share
something with us for that purpose.
We will come back to you with our take on how this might work best in our case, having regard to the
particularities of our governance arrangements and the litigation itself.
In the meantime, do please feel free to get in touch if there is anything you'd like to discuss.
Kind regards
Patrick
+ Patrick Bourke
Corporate Affairs Director
2017 Winner of the Global
Postal Award for Customer
Experience
FEO EI OEE ICI OFS EOE OIFOREI ORO OSISOEO SHORE OSE OEE IESE IO ISIE
This email and any attachments are confidential and intended for the addressee only. If you are not the named
recipient, you must not use, disclose, reproduce, copy or distribute the contents of this communication. If you have
received this in error, please contact the sender by reply email and then delete this email from your system. Any views
or opinions expressed within this email are solely those of the sender, unless otherwise specifically stated.
POST OFFICE LIMITED is registered in England and Wales no 2154540. Registered Office: Finsbury Dials, 20 Finsbury
Street, London EC2Y 9AQ.
JESSE OSES OCIS E OIE OSI OSIORE ORS OSI ESCO SFORIEI OSES SEI IESE IA ISIE
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
This email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the use of the individual(s) to whom they are
addressed. If you are not the intended recipient and have received this email in error, please notify the sender
and delete the email. This footnote also confirms that our email communications may be monitored to ensure
the secure and effective operation of our systems and for other lawful purposes, and that this email has been
swept for malware and viruses.
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
POL-0038254
POL00041772
POL00041772
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
POL-0038254